• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Oklahoma Tea Party Plans To Form Armed Militia

A valid source for what?

The Obama is -keeping- GWB's cuts for families making under $250K
Those cuts, as noted, cut taxes for 98% of working families.

The only question here is why is The Obamanation champining tax cuts that they claimed, from their inception, were only for the rich?

The answer to that? Partisan bigotry.

The problem with your specious argument is that the Shrubbery cut taxes for everyone but who actually benefited from those cuts? The cuts were surely by political design in that they could claim everyone gets a cut but only the rich actually benefited. If you don't understand how that works let me know and I'll spell it out for you.
 
Oh and one more thing. As part of the Tea Party, he's called me racist, homophobe, and far worse things. :shrug:

What did I lie about jingo? Please quote and link.
So now you're going to play dumb?

Oh and one more thing. As part of the Tea Party, he's called me racist, homophobe, and far worse things. :shrug:

Sniffle... you gonna cry?

When you defend racism you might get called a racist.
If I called you a homophobe then you must have deserved it. I don't recall doing so however so prove it.
"and far worse things", link.

Oh, and it's not "playing the race card" if racism is present.
 
So now you're going to play dumb?



Personal attacks? why don't you come on down where your mouth has to cash those checks it writes...


You infered I was a racist, then cowered out of actually calling me one. Pathetic.



Oh, and it's not "playing the race card" if racism is present.



Again with the crying and whining about being the poor little black guy, with whitey always picking on him......


You do a great diservice to actual civil rights issues with your constant whining and crying about windmills of racism don q. :roll:


It's embarrasing, I am embarrassed for you.
 
Credit for what, exactly? I'm a bit confused. Yes, he cut taxes for a lot of people, though some had worries that they did too much to help the rich and not enough to help the middle class. Obama also cut taxes for almost everyone, and he should get credit for that.
GWB cut taxes for everyone that paid taxes.
The Obama is continuing GWB's middle-class tax cuts; The Obama did not cut taxes for everyone, and raised taxes on some.
 
The problem with your specious argument is that the Shrubbery cut taxes for everyone but who actually benefited from those cuts?
Everyone.
The cuts were surely by political design in that they could claim everyone gets a cut but only the rich actually benefited.
No... the tax cuts were for everyone, and everyone actuallly benefitted.
If you don't understand how that works let me know and I'll spell it out for you.
What I do not understand is how GWB cutting taxes for the middle class was a useless effort that benefitted no one, but The Obama retaining those same tax cuts is worthwhile as they benefit everyone.
 
GWB cut taxes for everyone that paid taxes.
The Obama is continuing GWB's middle-class tax cuts; The Obama did not cut taxes for everyone, and raised taxes on some.

Obama did cut taxes for 98% of working families. Those were separate from Bush's tax cuts
 
Everyone.

No... the tax cuts were for everyone, and everyone actuallly benefitted.
You're right, everyone who got a tax cut benefited. What I meant was who benefited most?

And yes it was a political move, otherwise it would not have been an "across the board" cut.

What I do not understand is how GWB cutting taxes for the middle class was a useless effort that benefitted no one, but The Obama retaining those same tax cuts is worthwhile as they benefit everyone.
Obviously you don't understand. Retaining the cuts for 98% of Americans simply means they aren't getting a tax increase. It was useless under the Shrub because it was a token cut on 98% but a hefty cut for the ridiculously rich.
 
The middle class and those people who had jobs because the higher tax brackets had more money to invest in labour?
How'd that work out? Not so good eh? Don't worry, I'm not going to ridicule you for continuing to believe in trickle down economics even though the proof that it doesn't work is all around us. :2wave:
 
How'd that work out? Not so good eh? Don't worry, I'm not going to ridicule you for continuing to believe in trickle down economics even though the proof that it doesn't work is all around us. :2wave:
There isnt any such proof, especially if you mean the recent and current economic slump - that there is currently an economic downturn in no way means that the previous tax cuts did not help inprove the economy prior to said downturn.
 
You're right, everyone who got a tax cut benefited. What I meant was who benefited most?
Irrelevant -- everyone, contrary to the claims at the time, still repeated here, benefitted.

Obviously you don't understand. Retaining the cuts for 98% of Americans simply means they aren't getting a tax increase. It was useless under the Shrub because it was a token cut on 98% but a hefty cut for the ridiculously rich.
If GWBs tax cut was 'token' and effectively meaningless to the middle class, why retain it?
 
There isnt any such proof, especially if you mean the recent and current economic slump - that there is currently an economic downturn in no way means that the previous tax cuts did not help inprove the economy prior to said downturn.
The proof is the last 29 years and the effects can be seen all around us in the form of bubbles and recessions and a crumbling infrastructure.
 
Irrelevant -- everyone, contrary to the claims at the time, still repeated here, benefitted.
It's only irrelevant if you're looking for a way out of the hole you're digging.

If GWBs tax cut was 'token' and effectively meaningless to the middle class, why retain it?
Politics you numbskull. It doesn't do anything to keep the token cuts but it would mean a lot to remove them... even though both actions are actually meaningless.

Your problem here is that you think I'm an Obama supporter when actually I'm just against the stupid arguments the rightwing makes against him.
 
The proof is the last 29 years and the effects can be seen all around us in the form of bubbles and recessions and a crumbling infrastructure.

You mean none of those things happened prior to 29 years ago?
 
Nope, that's not what I said or what I mean.

This is what you said as proof that trickle down doesn't work. Obviously you've forgotten it already.

The proof is the last 29 years and the effects can be seen all around us in the form of bubbles and recessions and a crumbling infrastructure.

The clear implication is that prior to 29 years ago (i.e before trickle down economics) there were no bubbles or recessions or crumbling infrastructure. If you didn't mean what was clearly implied, then perhaps you'd like to clarify yourself a tad.
 
This is what you said as proof that trickle down doesn't work. Obviously you've forgotten it already.



The clear implication is that prior to 29 years ago (i.e before trickle down economics) there were no bubbles or recessions or crumbling infrastructure. If you didn't mean what was clearly implied, then perhaps you'd like to clarify yourself a tad.
No thanks, I don't feel like getting into another "Reagan ****ed us up" VS "No he didn't" argument. Which is what it would end up being.
 
No thanks, I don't feel like getting into another "Reagan ****ed us up" VS "No he didn't" argument. Which is what it would end up being.

Okay, so you can't really support what you said. Thanks.
 
Pretty well actually, far far lower unemployment under GHWB than under the Messiah aka the worst POTUS since at least Carter.

You do realize the problems started under Bush. You seem to be making a causal relationship error in your thinking.
 
Pretty well actually, far far lower unemployment under GHWB than under the Messiah aka the worst POTUS since at least Carter.
So you don't know that the economic situation under the Shrub was nothing but a bubble? You don't know that wages were flat or declining and that we had the slowest economic growth under him since...

The number of jobs in the nation increased by about 2 percent during Bush's tenure, the most tepid growth over any eight-year span since data collection began seven decades ago. Gross domestic product, a broad measure of economic output, grew at the slowest pace for a period of that length since the Truman administration. And Americans' incomes grew more slowly than in any presidency since the 1960s, other than that of Bush's father.

Bush and his aides are quick to point out that they oversaw 52 straight months of job growth in the middle of this decade, and that the economy expanded at a steady clip from 2003 to 2007. But economists, including some former advisers to Bush, say it increasingly looks as if the nation's economic expansion was driven to a large degree by the interrelated booms in the housing market, consumer spending and financial markets. Those booms, which the Bush administration encouraged with the idea of an "ownership society," have proved unsustainable.
 
So you don't know that the economic situation under the Shrub was nothing but a bubble? You don't know that wages were flat or declining and that we had the slowest economic growth under him since...





Refering to Bush as "Shrub" does not make you any soun any more intelligent than one using chimp for Obama. Just sayin. :2wave:
 
Back
Top Bottom